Feedback and Assessment Intent
This policy aims to establish a consistent approach to feedback and assessment across all subject areas. It focuses on ensuring that feedback is meaningful and individualised, encouraging students to actively engage with it to demonstrate progress. By fostering a culture of ownership over their learning, we aim to build a strong foundation for continuous, ambitious, and innovative Assessment for Learning (AFL).
Assessment for Learning (AFL)
Assessment for Learning is central to our teaching practice. AFL strategies—both formal and informal, formative and summative—are used to support progress in every lesson. Formal assessments such as tests, exams, and essays are complemented by informal strategies like questioning, live feedback, and peer/self-assessment. Incorporating AFL into lesson planning and assessment practices ensures that every student has the opportunity to make progress.
Formative Assessment and Feedback
Students receive regular formative feedback based on our Strength, Improvement, and Challenge (SIC) framework. This feedback highlights their strengths, areas for improvement, and sets challenges to drive further progress. The frequency of formative assessment is aligned with the number of curriculum hours allocated to each subject area:
- 4+ hours per week: feedback every two weeks
- 2-3 hours per week: feedback every three weeks
- 1 hour per week: feedback every four weeks
Feedback is presented on a ‘Purple Sheet,’ and students respond to feedback during dedicated lesson time using a green pen to ensure they engage with the feedback.
Summative Assessment and Feedback
Summative assessments are conducted at the end of a unit or project and are marked using a consistent and fixed set of criteria specific to each subject. These assessments provide a comprehensive overview of each student’s progress and are moderated within faculties. After each summative assessment, students receive SIC feedback, identifying their strengths, areas for improvement, and setting challenges. Summative assessment data is collected and reported internally three times a year.
Literacy Marking
Work reviewed for formative and summative assessments is marked for literacy using a common marking code. This ensures consistency in how we address spelling, punctuation, grammar, and word choice errors. Students are expected to correct these errors in green pen, and whole-class teaching is provided where frequent errors are identified.
The marking codes are:
- SP: Spelling error
- CP: Capitalisation error
- P: Punctuation error
- G: Grammar error
- WC: Word choice error
Standards
Students are expected to maintain their books to a high standard, with clear dates and titles, fully completed work, and legible handwriting. While presentation is important, the focus of feedback remains on student progress. Standards are monitored at a faculty level during SLT and CL quality assurance checks.
Data-Driven Instruction (DDI)
Data from assessments is used to inform future teaching practices. Reflection exercises are carried out by class teachers and curriculum leaders to analyse assessment results, identifying areas for improvement and making necessary adjustments to lesson plans, schemes of work, and teaching strategies. Reflection exercises include class and cohort reflection grids, which guide actions such as reteaching specific concepts or adapting future lesson plans to address identified weaknesses.
Target setting plays a crucial role in promoting student progress and achievement at Sir William Stanier School and FFT20 and FFT50 (Fisher Family Trust) are widely used statistical models that effectively support this process.
These models provide valuable insights into students' expected performance based on their prior attainment, by analysing historical data and taking into account various factors such as socioeconomic background and other contextual information. The generated targets are both challenging and realistic, enabling educators to tailor their teaching and learning strategies to meet the specific needs of each student, ensuring that they are appropriately challenged and supported.
Using FFT20 and FFT50 to set targets help foster a culture of high expectations and continuous improvement at Sir William Stanier. These models empower us to set ambitious yet achievable goals, and support them in tracking student progress and evaluating the effectiveness of their teaching approaches.
Sir William Stanier School utilises a comprehensive approach to reporting home to parents and carers by incorporating both Minimum Expected Grades (MEGs) based on FFT50 data and Aspirational grades based on FFT20 data, alongside a student's current working grade.
By utilising FFT50 data, the school can determine the minimum grades that a student is expected to achieve based on their prior attainment. These MEGs serve as a benchmark to ensure that students are making progress in line with their potential. Additionally, FFT20 data provides aspirational grades that challenge students to aim higher and exceed expectations. By considering a student's current working grade, which reflects their ongoing progress and performance, the school can provide a holistic picture of a student's academic journey to parents and carers.
Additionally, Sir William Stanier School recognises the crucial role attendance plays in academic success and ensures that it is factored into the reporting process. By acknowledging the importance of regular attendance, the school emphasises the significance of consistent engagement in the learning process, as it greatly contributes to students' overall achievement and progress.
This comprehensive reporting system allows for a well-rounded understanding of a student's achievements, potential, and areas for improvement, fostering a collaborative and supportive environment between the school and home.